772 F. Supp. 2d 287
D.D.C.2011Background
- A.G. is a 15-year-old DCPS student whose testing in 2007 concluded no learning disability and no eligibility for special education.
- Theodore, parent and next friend, argued DCPS failed to fund independent psychological testing to determine eligibility and FAPE.
- Multiple due process hearings (DPHR #1-3) were held; HOD #1 and #2 found A.G. ineligible and DCPS properly evaluated.
- HOD #3, issued December 2008, dismissed Theodore’s complaint as barred by res judicata after concluding previous complaints resolved the matter.
- The Court previously dismissed moot requests and retained a remaining FAPE/due process issue; cross-motions for summary judgment are now before the court.
- The district court grants defendants’ summary judgment and denies Theodore’s summary judgment motion based on res judicata conclusions.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether HOD #3 properly applied res judicata | Theodore argues new evidence avoids preclusion | DCPS evidence was previously litigated in HOD #1 and HOD #2 | Yes; HOD #3 barred by claim preclusion |
| Whether new evidence could avoid claim preclusion | New ADHD-related material could circumvent prior rulings | New evidence did not alter the nucleus of facts; barred | No; new evidence did not defeat res judicata |
Key Cases Cited
- Parklane Hosiery Co. v. Shore, 439 U.S. 322 (U.S. 1979) (claim preclusion and full faith in prior judgments)
- Lindsey v. Dist. of Columbia, 609 F. Supp. 2d 71 (D.D.C. 2009) (claim preclusion in administrative context)
- Friendship Edison Public Charter School v. Suggs, 562 F. Supp. 2d 141 (D.D.C. 2008) (preclusion in administrative proceedings)
- Owens v. Dist. of Columbia, 631 F. Supp. 2d 48 (D.D.C. 2009) (preclusion and final judgments in prior actions)
- Guerrero v. Katzen, 774 F.2d 506 (D.C. Cir. 1985) (new evidence not excusing res judicata absent fraud or non-discoverability)